Thanks Bert, I added your comments to our list of comments to process
for the last call draft. Yes you are right about the typo for sure.
Sean
On 3/14/07, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org> wrote:
>
> Here are the comments from the CSS WG on
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-mobileOK-basic10-tests-20070130/
>
> [The deadline was yesterday, but I forgot to send them before going
> home. Sorry.]
>
>
> section 2.3.4:
> The "not" in "style elements whose type attribute is not
> "text/css"" is erroneous since the type attribute on the style
> element is REQUIRED as per [2]. Maybe just a typo?
>
>
> section 3.4:
> "If the Internet media type is "text/css" and the content is not
> well-formed CSS (contains mismatching brackets or illegal
> characters), FAIL" should probably be rewritten, because CSS doesn't
> define the term "well-formed."
>
> But it is not immediately clear what it should be rewritten as. The
> CSS spec is written to (1) allow future extensions and (2) to make
> the meaning well-defined for as large a set of inputs as possible. A
> visual UA will ignore the (legal) 'cue' property the same way it
> ignores the (misspelled) 'magrin' property. There is no need for CSS
> to say that one is legal and the other an error.
>
> Illegal characters and unparsable input are explicitly undefined in
> CSS, so there is no doubt that those must not be "mobileOK." On the
> other hand, the handling of unbalanced parentheses *is*
> well-defined. Informally, the wording suggests that unbalanced
> parentheses are worse errors than unknown properties, but in the
> spec they are handled the same way, viz., with rules to throw away
> parsed tokens.
>
> Maybe: "If [...] content triggers at least one CSS parsing error as
> defined in the CSS specification, FAIL."
>
> CSS 2.1 has a section 4.2 called "parsing errors," but there are
> errors defined in other sections, too. CSS 2.1 section 4.2 has this:
>
> - Unknown properties
> - Illegal values
> - Malformed declarations
> - Invalid at-keywords (*)
> - Unexpected end of style sheet
> - Unexpected end of string
> - (by reference to 4.1.7:) Invalid selector
>
> (* already separated out in MobileOK section 3.22)
>
> Other errors are defined in section 4.1:
>
> - Input that cannot be tokenized or parsed (section 4.1.1)
> - Vendor-specific extensions (4.1.2.1)
> - U+0 character (4.1.3)
> - Non-Unicode characters (4.1.3)
>
> For example, a style sheet that consists of just this
>
> ;;;
>
> cannot be parsed.
>
> [2]
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xhtml-modularization-20010410/dtd_module_defs.html#a_module_Style_Sheet
>
>
> For the CSS WG,
> Bert
> --
> Bert Bos ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/
> http://www.w3.org/people/bos W3C/ERCIM
> bert@w3.org 2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93
> +33 (0)4 92 38 76 92 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
>
>